| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.09.99 23:21l 207 Lines 6891 Bytes #-9773 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_235A
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/235A
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0CRL<DB0TTM<DB0FP<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0NHM<DB0SHG<DB0HSK<
PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990920/1746Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:380 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_235A
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA19342 ; Mon, 20 Sep 99 16:38:16 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00015700 ; Mon, 20 Sep 99 18:17:51 MET
Date: Mon, 20 Sep 99 18:11:11 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_235A>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/235A
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
Ham-Digital Digest Sun, 19 Sep 99 Volume 99 : Issue 235
Today's Topics:
Anyone tried RadioCom 4.0???
DDS chip
FullDup RF links, anyone? (9 msgs)
Ham tcpip network = pipedream
Help: Shutdown Fault with "Logger"
Kenwood "HamWindows"
leadership, was The Applications Mantra
Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales (3 msgs)
Packet radio with Newtons
PSK 31 and Soundblaster PCI (2 msgs)
Wanted SCS PTC II
Send Replies or notes for publication to: <Ham-Digital@UCSD.Edu>
Send subscription requests to: <Ham-Digital-REQUEST@UCSD.Edu>
Problems you can't solve otherwise to brian@ucsd.edu.
Archives of past issues of the Ham-Digital Digest are available
(by FTP only) from ftp.UCSD.Edu in directory "mailarchives/ham-digital".
We trust that readers are intelligent enough to realize that all text
herein consists of personal comments and does not represent the official
policies or positions of any party. Your mileage may vary. So there.
Loop-Detect: Ham-Digital:99/235
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 10:48:23 -0400
From: al <no@spam.here>
Subject: Anyone tried RadioCom 4.0???
On Sat, 18 Sep 1999 05:09:31 GMT, ke8hh@arrl.net wrote:
):>
):> My major interest is in finding a Windows 98 compatible program
):>that uses the sound card to send/receive cw & rtty (I've tried CW Get &
):>CW Put--CW Get I've had "mixed" results with [it copies, but with an
):>enormous number of errors compared to, for example, an MFJ-1278B] and
):>
):> Thanks in advance for any suggestions or comments.
):>
):> 73
):>
):> Rick
You may want to checkout: http://www.muenster.de/~welp/sb.htm
He lists alot of "soundcard" pgms.
Al
al at olg dot com
code3gold,m1200,535d,r70
wash dc , usa
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 22:36:06 +0200
From: dwparsons@t-online.de (Dave Parsons)
Subject: DDS chip
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999 18:30:58, artky1k@northlandlink.com (K Sorter) wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I need a DDS chip, and would rather NOT use the Analog Devices chips
> (if possible). I need a SIMPLE DDS chip, don't need amplitude control,
> PSK generating/phase shift capability and 1 hz steps up to 500 kc
> output frequency would be great.
>
> Parallel or simple serial inputs to control the output frequency would
> be a plus.
>
> Does anyone make DDS chips or am I stuck with the AD super chip?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Art
>
>
Have a look at www.qualcomm.com
--
73 Dave
DL1MGQ/G3SLJ
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 11:48:07 GMT
From: steve_sampson@my-deja.com
Subject: FullDup RF links, anyone?
Cathryn Mataga wrote:
> Where do people get these things. There's a guy here in Concord who
> uses GE Myteks, I think they're called, but I've never seen these for
> sale anywhere either. Is there a online store that stocks this kind
> of thing, or is this a swap meet item?
There used to be an ad in the Ham magazines, there may still. I've
only seen them at the Dallas Hamfest. Most other Hamfests are too
small around here.
> So, if you had a site with 2 duplex links, then you put both receivers
> on 2 meters and both transmitters on 440mhz, right?
I think the bottom line is, that you don't want to have to invest in a
cavity, although they aren't that expensive, and operate with
frequencies that are seperated by a couple megahertz. This is so one
system doesn't desense the other.
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Sep 1999 06:35:01 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: FullDup RF links, anyone?
Rob Janssen <nomail@pe1chl.demon.nl> wrote in message
news:slrn7u6m9o.ig8.nomail@linux.pe1chl.ampr.org...
>
> >What do you *DO* with the networks?
>
> >This is not a "dumb question" nor am I attempting to flame anyone or
> >start an argument. I just honestly don't know what I or most any other
> >ham would do with a packet network, regardless of how well it works.
> >Color me stupid or behind the times, I guess . . .
Rob here is a good A type... I'm sure his reply to this question will
serve well of an example of A type thinking.
>
> I use it less and less all the time...
Told you!
> The only permanent use that is left is to have a permanent telnet
> connection to some friends, where topics of the day are discussed like
> they would be on a local FM channel. Only these connections are too
> long-ranged to be made directly, so they are made across a couple of
> network nodes.
What a thoughtful guy! Sets up a permanent connection over a couple of
nodes, QRM'ing his fellow hams 24/7 to no particular purpose.
Too much bother to just connect to these folks when you actually wish to
talk with them?
Remember that an important component of the A philosophy is a complete
disregard for the activities of other Hams that are "non A". This is a big
part of why amateur tcpip does not have a very good reputation among the
mainstream packet folks.
I see tcpip'ers talking (CC pid) on the local zoo channel frequently. Their
systems typically exchange four or five packets for every one that actually
contains information, and these are repeated a number of times before one
actually gets through. - This when hardly anybody else is experiencing any
significant retries.
Gee, why would they call tcpip and it's users "inefficient channel hogs" ?
>
> At least as long as this is still easily possible. The network nodes
> now natively route IP traffic, so a permanent TCP session (between telnet
> applications) is possible without any traffic when nothing is typed.
Another giant step backwards for amateur packet radio.
>
> Sadly enough, other amateurs don't see the beauty of routing IP in the
> network, and want to "upgrade" it to FlexNET. But FlexNET cannot route
> IP, and forces you to use a surrogate: route it yourself and tunnel the
> traffic through AX.25 connections that end up at another station that
> routes IP. This would be a big step back, and probably the end of my
> last use of the network.
Won't be long now! Unfortunately, Rob is full of farina about FlexNet being
useless for tcpip. I wish he was right, but...
To be continued in digest: hd_99_235B
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
